Now it’s Wolverines threatened by global warming

Wolverines make their home mainly in the boreal forests and tundra regions of North America, Europe, and Asia. (Photo by Vince Maidens, Creative Commons License.)

No mention though of the “adopt a wolverine” program that has proven so popular with polar bears and NGO’s looking for cold cash from the gullible. I guess they just aren’t cuddly enough. According to Wikipedia:

“The world’s total wolverine population is unknown.”

The Wildlife Conservation Society reported in June 2009 that a wolverine which researchers had been tracking for almost three months had crossed into northern Colorado. Society officials had tagged the young male wolverine in Wyoming near Grand Teton National Park and it had traveled southward for approximately 500 miles. It was the first wolverine seen in Colorado since 1919, and its appearance was also confirmed by the Colorado Division of Wildlife.

And again in 2009. They say that “Wolverines have not been scientifically confirmed in California since the 1920s.” With a former range like that, I suppose they won’t have trouble adapting to a warmer place. Last time I checked, it was warmer in Colorado and California than in Canada.

Nature is pretty darn tough, very adaptable, and the wolverine is no exception. IMO, the bigger threat, like with bears, is clashes with human developments. I just don’t buy the claim of this study, note the weasel words “highly uncertain” in the highlighted portion of the press release.

BOULDER—The aggressive wolverine may not be powerful enough to survive climate change in the contiguous United States, new research concludes.

Wolverine habitat in the northwestern United States is likely to warm dramatically if society continues to emit large amounts of greenhouse gases, according to new computer model simulations carried out at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). The study found that climate change is likely to imperil the wolverine in two ways: reducing or eliminating the springtime snow cover that wolverines rely on to protect and shelter newborn kits, and increasing August temperatures well beyond what the species may be able to tolerate.

“Species that depend on snow cover for their survival are likely to be very vulnerable to climate change,” says NCAR scientist Synte Peacock, the author of the study. “It’s highly uncertain whether wolverines will continue to survive in the lower 48, given the changes that are likely to take place there.”

Peacock’s research focused on mountainous regions of the Northwest, the primary habitat of the wolverine population in the contiguous United States. The study did not look into the impacts of climate change on regions where wolverines are more numerous, such as Canada, although other research has indicated those areas will likely warm significantly as well.

The study was published last week in Environmental Research Letters. It was funded by the National Science Foundation, NCAR’s sponsor.

An animal built for the cold

Wolverines make their home mainly in the boreal forests and tundra regions of North America, Europe, and Asia. Their thick, oily fur insulates them from frost and large padded paws help them run through deep snow. While some 15,000 or more wolverines are believed to roam Canada and an unknown number in Alaska, only a few dozen to a few hundred are believed to live in the contiguous United States, almost entirely in mountainous areas in Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, and Washington.

Wolverines inhabit regions that have late-season snow cover and relatively cool summer temperatures. Female wolverines make their springtime dens in the snow, which provides warmth to the newborn kits and protects them from predators.

Biologists are dubious that the species could survive in regions with little spring snow or significantly higher summertime temperatures. Concerned over habitat loss and the potential threat of climate change, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service announced in December 2010 that the wolverine warrants protection under the Endangered Species Act, but delayed that protection because other species took higher priority.

To project the future climate in regions of the contiguous United States where wolverines live, Peacock analyzed results from new simulations carried out by a team of researchers at NCAR using the newest version of the Community Climate System Model (which was developed by scientists at the Department of Energy and NCAR with colleagues at other organizations). She analyzed three scenarios of greenhouse gas emissions: low (carbon dioxide emissions stay at present-day levels until 2020 and then decline to zero by the early 2080s); medium-low (emissions rise slightly until 2040 and then decline sharply toward the end of the century); and high (emissions continue to increase unabated).

In the high emissions scenario, the computer simulations showed spring snow cover nearly or completely vanishing during the second half of this century in present-day wolverine habitat. Similarly, spring snow cover in the medium-low scenario became greatly diminished, with many years experiencing zero snow cover. Under the low emissions scenario, springtime snow cover conditions remained similar to those of the present day.

The computer projections also showed that August temperatures may increase dramatically. Whereas August temperatures currently top off at about 72 degrees F (22 degrees C) in areas where wolverines live, maximum daily temperatures by the end of the century were projected to frequently exceed 90 degrees F (32 degrees C) under the two higher-emissions scenarios.

“Unless the wolverine is able to very rapidly adapt to summertime temperatures far above anything it currently experiences, and to a spring with little or no snow cover, it is unlikely that it will continue to survive in the contiguous U.S. under a high or medium-low emissions scenario,” the study concludes.

The model simulations also indicated the extent to which climate change may transform the West, where society depends on mountain snowpack. This critical source of water could decrease by a factor of three to four over Idaho, western Montana, and western Wyoming by the end of this century under the high emissions scenario. Even under the medium-low emissions scenario, snowpack could drop by a factor of two to three in these regions.

Peacock checked the accuracy of the model by comparing simulations of late 20th century climate with observations. Results indicated that the model did a good job simulating climate conditions in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. Since the model tended to underestimate snowpack in Washington, Peacock did not include that state in the study.

About the article

Title: Projected 21st century climate change for wolverine habitats within the contiguous United States

This sounds more like the spiel of those pumping lousy stocks than scientific research. At least with polar bears we could do a count and see one way or the other what is happening to the population.
It would be nice to get a definitive statement on the range of wolverines and the population dynamics in any particular area.

Why not move the wolverines and polar bears to Antarctica? There’s record levels of snow and ice there, and plenty of food – millions of penguins, and a few scientists, but those are no loss if they are just looking at the climate!
/sarc

I didn’t see any dogs today therefore their survival is threatened by global warming. There, can I get a huge government funded research grant now?

There never were a lot of wolverines, and if there is some large niche in the ecology that they are required to fill we’d be in a lot of trouble for centuries already. Heck with wolverines I prefer badgers any day.

A little related anecdote; It is widely known that mountain lions do not exist in the wild in Wisconsin. Our DNR tells us so and for years dismissed all sightings as non credible. When two mountain lions were killed the same weekend in auto accidents 200 miles apart the DNR gave a very grudging admission that maybe they did exist.

But, putting together the story on ocean ridges and climate models just before this on WUWT, and the information that Marten fossils have been found from the mid-Miocene (or more than 10 million years before present), the animals appear to have survived a warming much like the one computer models claim will befall us any minute.

Wolverine habitat in the northwestern United States is likely to warm dramatically if society continues to emit large amounts of greenhouse gases, according to new computer model simulations carried out at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).

I, and on a different occasion, one of my sons, encountered female wolverines in Northern British Columbia. These are the meanest, most aggressive creatures you ever want to meet. I risked my life climbing a rock ledge, my son jumped into a pickup truck to get away. Its hard for me to imagine predators that could take young away from one of these! Why wouldn’t a scientist mention which predators they are worried about and how abundant are these predators in the lower 48.

“Much of my work involves using large global ocean general circulation models to investigate the uptake and redistribution of natural and anthropogenic trace gases in the ocean. I have worked mainly with the POP and MICOM ocean models. I am also interested in glacial-interglacial CO2, interpretation of records from deep-sea sediment cores, and I also like to play with box models (which have the beautiful property of actually allowing one to understand exactly what is happening and why).”

So a geophysicist who deals with global ocean circulation and deep sea sediment cores writes a paper on wolverines in the middle of the North American continent.

Correct me if I am wrong but North American is land not ocean and wolverines are land animals not ocean animals.

I also see she likes ‘box models’ because you can actually understand what is happening and why”. Might that be because box models aren’t really good at simulating real world chaotic systems like climates and the oceans?

Wolverines are scavengers and one of the orneriest animals on Earth. They will not have a problem in warmer weather — makes it easier to hunt. Their probably moving into Colorado to pick off chubby tourists. ; )

It’s easy to be a biology researcher today, you just have to swallow a Warming Camel, like this one: Whereas August temperatures currently top off at about 72 degrees F (22 degrees C) in areas where wolverines live, maximum daily temperatures by the end of the century were projected to frequently exceed 90 degrees F (32 degrees C) under the two higher-emissions scenarios.

… and then you get paid double: A research grant, and an easy research task: Show that there will be dramatic ecosystems changes “when” climate changes from temperate to tropic, arctic to temperate etc.

I’ve been noticing that articles have been referring to “according to computer model simulations,” more. We can all doubt a human due to bias and such but not a computer model as if it is it’s own entity, without emotion and bias.

But what the AGW believers’ cousins, the cryptozoologists, want to know is if this will affect Bigfoot or the chupacabra? Another pro-AGW article filled with “likely” and “models,” one day one of these people will accidentally conduct real research and will be found in a state of shock at the realization that they had been wrong.

Well, up where I’m from (Muskoka, about two hours north of Toronto, Canada), the problem is with fishers (little cousins of wolverines). The problem? They eat cats.

The fishers were actually introduced to deal with….porcupines. Now that the porcupine population is under control, the question is now: what to do with an overpopulation of fishers?

So its pretty much an open secret that its “shoot on sight”. Not to mention bringing in the trappers (who are also taking martens, which explains the explosion in the squirrel population, which has led to another culling – to protect the bird feeders).

As well, the government re-introduced elk, which pushed out the moose, which led to a huge increase in the deer population, which has led to starvation…and the cycle continues.

When you have a couple of isolated anecdotes there is clearly no point in paying attention to those silly systematic studies scientists do. And this holds doubly true if the anecdotes confirm what you want to believe!

Regarding the Michigan find: “Raymond Rustem, supervisor of the natural heritage unit in the department’s wildlife division, said the wolverine could have traveled to the state, been released or escaped from captivity. “What it means, who knows?” Rustem said. “When you take a look at the wolverine, there’s always been this debate about whether wolverines ever were a part of Michigan’s recent past. Some evidence shows that, some says no.””

Ten degrees C?? This article is pure nonsense — just another propaganda contribution to the IPCC’s new “biodiversity” theme, “catastrophic warming” and “catastrophic ocean acicification” both having been laughed off.

Its lucky for the wolverine population that global warming is now known to cause so much global snow. Perhaps when the NCAR model has been adjusted for the ‘by warm we mean cold’ and ‘when we say no snow in the foreseeable future, we mean blizzards every winter’, then they will be able to relieve those worried Wyoming wolverines. ;-)

I’m afraid that every time I se something that is blamed on either Climate Change, or Global Warming, I tend to switch off, and I’m sure the majority of the public now does the same. It doesn’t ring true, shock, or surprise any more – they’ve called it far too many times. The only solution, it would appear, would be for mankind to commit mass suicide, then things everywhere, and for everything else, will be OK and hunky dory, apparently. But who would be left to confirm this prognosis, I wonder? I’d guess at the Al Gores of this world, who would obviously make sure that THEY survived…

It is also highly uncertain that any of the wolverines will read this article, but for those that do, when they look at all the snow in the US right now, they won’t know which way to turn to preserve their species.

Doesn’t really matter what the global temps are, if we wipe out their habitats, they will not be very happy.

Suburban sprawl 20 to 50 miles from cities, putting houses in the middle of forests. The Greenies are right about this. Driving 60 miles per day just to get to work is a pointless waste of gasoline, land and time.

If they’d decisively give up the nonsense about warming, maybe the rest of us could listen to the Greenies on this problem!

“Nature is pretty darn tough, very adaptable, and the wolverine is no exception.”

An excellent argument. This is really top-quality science blogging, I must say. Why doesn’t WUWT rate with Nature, I wonder. Did you try to contact the authors of the wolverine study and tell them nature is pretty darn tough? They are probably totally ignorant about this.

>Concerned over habitat loss and the potential threat of climate change,….<
So, the real and present danger is not climatechange but habitat loss. The threat from CC is only a potential threeat. We have been living in 'global warming' times for I don't know how many years, with the Main Scream Media telling us, indoctrinating us into believing that the end is nigh. Now it's 2011 and the MSM, propped up by a few scientists are still trying to convince us that the this toad or that wolverine may be threatened by CC. I bet I will not see the day when CC really kicks in, unless they mean a freeze over, 'cause I'm freezing in here.

When I was a child of 11, camping out with the Cub scouts, near Tippecanoe State park in Indiana, we stumbled across a wolverine lair. It really got the Scout leader excited. I’m not an expert, with models backing up my beliefs, but I would be more inclined to believe that encroaching human habitat is more likely to drive these territorial animals away. Of course, hunting them nearly to extinction didn’t help either.

Actually, I don’t think “losing” the wolverine would be that much of a loss overall.

Like the Polar Bear, does anyone have ANY idea of how DESTRUCTIVE wolverines are? I recall some friends of my parents having one of those, “remaining species” wolverines get into their rather nicely furnished cabin in Wisconsin during the ’70’s.

Complete DESTRUCTION! Also, unlike their relative the Badger, which will avoid a human, a wolverine, WILL attack a human. Cases are rare…because (thankfully) they are “human adverse”.

I’m not sure, however, that growing the wolverine population by a factor of 5 (as the Polar Bears from IGY, 1957..or 10, or 20 would be a wise idea.

Let the critters go the way of the GIANT BEAVER and the SABER TOOTH TIGER! (Both of which are SORELY MISSED/sarc.)

Since we are not warming, the problem is solved. With all of the snow we have been having, the problem of snow cover should not be a big one. Also, it is assumed that they have to have snow cover to protect their young. They have survived other, warmer periods just fine, s mother does a good job of protecting the kids.

I think residents of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California are having little sympathy right now, as energy distruptions are causing rolling black outs and furnace shut downs.

Essientially the Greens have gotten much of what they’ve wanted the past 20 years. Fewer refineries, power plants, and fossil fuel exploration are causing energy shortages across much of the US. Our utility companies cannot no longer be counted on to provide basic services once the thermometer goes below 20 deg F. And what will we do if half of the nation goes two or three weeks below 0 deg F (something quite common during the 1960s through 1978)? The EPA continues to force many utility companies to close down coal burning power plants. They seldom grant permits for even natural gas power plants. And the folks in Texas now are seeing how reliable wind turbines are (they built a slew of them during the last decade in West Texas).

The most recent drastic climate change was the end of last glaciation. Did the wolverines that lived south of the glacier die off or did they go north? Since mountians were covered where did they go? You should answer the basics before going on to speculation.

I saw a wolverine in Northern California when working there in 1986. This was in the NW corner of the at an elevation of about 5000 ft about 10 miles north of the community of Cecilville.

It was a lighter color than the ones I was used to seeing in Northern Canada, but it definitely a wolverine (Canadian ones were a dull dark brown while the one I saw in California was a reddish brown color).

I did report it to the local Forest Ranger, but he said he doubted it was a wolverine as they were extinct. I expect is was not recorded as a sighting (or perhaps as not confirmed).

I expect such a report might not have been too welcome at that time, since it might have resulted in the loss of local forest jobs.

I remember reading a story about a wolverine which went to a new zoo. It’s cage wasn’t ready so they put it in with the polar bears while they finished up. When they came back, it had killed one of the polar bears. With a threat like this to an endangered species, you’d think that they would want to kill them off!

Also, which predator are they worried about getting at the wolverine cubs?

It is discouraging that these armchair scientists are continually willing to take public money to produce ‘studies’ based on completely unwarranted and unverified assumptions, amplified by speculative computer modeling.

Well, the snow on the ground is so high here in eastern Massachusetts that the squirrels can easily jump to the top of the squirrel baffle on the bird feeder, and snack to their hearts’ content. From this anecdotal observation, a fairly simple model will enable me to conclude that a little more global cooling will do wonders for the grey squirrel population—assuming, of course, that humans will continue to fill the bird feeders.

I have the pleasure of working in the Pine Pass area of British Columbia,witin known Wolverine habitat,near Azouzetta lk and Powder King . 550 23′ 39.44″N 122 37′ 25.86″
It is very rare to see a Wolverine,in the flesh.You do however come across various “signs” of them witin an area.If they are being witnessed I would venture out on a limb and say that there is more than the one.
I have a problem with this researcher stating that the Wolverines will decline due to
“Lack of snow couver for their young.” I have witnessed Wolverine’s using bear dens, as well as abandoned trappers cabins, for this purpose.
As far as predators go ,well ,as far as I know man is the only creature willing or stupid enough to tangle with a Wolverine.

This is a case of finding them where they were looking for them. I have seen wolverines in eastern Montana in the Milk River drainage. Might as well blame GW for the fate of the blackfooted ferret as well.

Why contact the author? The study alone proves she is a moron who knows nothing about wolverine biology. Anyways, most regulars here already know who she is. Anyone who actually studies wolverine, believes the prognosis for their future is pretty bright. This study is an incredibly obvious attempt to get pal-reviewed studies published in pseudo-scientific political advocacy journals to give support for an attempt to get Gulo gulo declared endangered as a means to farther the greeny anti-human agenda, despite massive amount of evidence too the contrary. Anyone whose brain has not been damaged by lefty idiocy can see this. BTW, the drive to get Gulo gulo delclared endangered has been going on for a few years now, but has run into a snag. Many of the Gulo gulo experts aren’t playing ball. That is why they have to call on political hacks with fault computer models for help.

I’m a 65 year old, aircraft engineer who retired from the Army 5 years ago, after 34 years service. I’ve now decided to come out of retirement to become a climate change “scientist”, because I can “make it up as I go along” every bit as well as any of the AGW brigade! Any takers?

I rather expect this one will be a hard sell. Wolverine’s are not cute and cuddly and they have a rather aggressive reputation. Not exactly a good poster animal to elicit sympathy and pathos.
###

I don’t know if this is entirely accurate. A lot of people love the wolverine. I sure do. They are one of my favorite critters, right next to ol’ C. latrans. The only problem I see, is that most of us, who like wolverines are rather like them in disposition, not the type of people to rally around a fallacious cause.

The lower 48 is their extreme lower habitat, they have never been “common” in the lower 48. They are circumpolar and are in no danger of extinction in their normal habitat.
It goes against the myth, but they do make excellent pets.

I stopped reading when I got to the “no wolverines in Colorado” BS. I’ve got a photo of a wolverine in Colorado that was taken in 1997. And then in 2006 I just missed a photo of another one near Stoney Pass. I also have photogtaphic proof of at least one grizzly that was taken on Cochetopa Creek in ’97.

One of the things most people don’t realize is that the environmental organizations either send out blind people to do wildlife counts – or they cook the books to minimize the numbers and exxagerate the “threat”. I’ve run into this all over the Rockies, from the Mexican border to Mt Robson in Canada, as well as in the East.

Are they really endangered if a little farther into suitable habitat there historically normal or robust populations?

There seems to be a pattern of declaring the far reaches of a critter’s range critical habitat and the critter endangered because there aren’t abundant populations there. By definition that is why it is the edge if their range.

Examples that come to mind are the spotted owl and the wolf. The spotted owl is rare in WA state, but common in Mexico. Likewise the world is not short on wolves, but here in WI they are endangered.

Maybe we need to look at overall populations when declaring something endangered, not just populations in marginal areas of their range.

Glen Shevlin says:
February 4, 2011 at 6:31 am

“Wolverine…. basically a 40 pound weasel with an attitude that the Pitsburgh Steelers defence aspires to attain…..

Around here (Northern WI) you can add timber wolves, cougars, and badgers to that list of mean protected critters. I have actually had a badger charge me while I was going down the road on my motorcycle. That is a mean critter.

So, the entire jist of the article is that manmade climate warming will negatively affect the Wolverines.
Why, then, does the article refer to “Climate Change” rather than ” Anthropogenic Global Warming”?

We must stop planting radishes. As I heard as a youth “Why do they plant radishes around buckwheat fields?” “To keep the wolverines out. Have you ever a wolverine in a buckwheat field? It’s because they plant radishes around them”.

I remember reading a story about a wolverine which went to a new zoo. It’s cage wasn’t ready so they put it in with the polar bears while they finished up. When they came back, it had killed one of the polar bears. With a threat like this to an endangered species, you’d think that they would want to kill them off!

Also, which predator are they worried about getting at the wolverine cubs?
###

Wolverine are the only animals that are documented as taking kills from a Brown bears. If I remember correctly, in a straight on fight, they have a 50% chance of driving the bear off.

“..Wolverines threatened by global warming”
This is probably ‘news’ to Michigan…. but the Wisconsin Badgers and the Ohio Buckeyes surely approve!
};>)

(For our non US readers, the sports teams from Michigan University are referred to as ‘Wolverines’, after their University mascot. The University teams referenced above are all in the “Big Ten Conference” of collegiate athletics competition.)

Wolverines are cool. They have adapted to climate change in the past, they continue to do so today. I’m sure tired of the “______ is threatened by Climate Change” stories we hear so frequently. We still hear these things, who is still paying for them?

Next endangered species by Climate Change (A.K.A.: Current Maunder-like minimum): Human species, then the post would read:BOULDER—The aggressive human kind may not be powerful enough to survive climate change in the contiguous United States, new research concludes

According to the Wik article, wolverines have no natural predators, but the kits are sometimes taken by predatory birds.

Also from the article, “Their populations have experienced a steady decline since the 19th century in the face of trapping, range reduction and habitat fragmentation, such that they are essentially absent in the southern end of their European range.”

Not climate change, which the study suggests may or may not impact the wolverine’s ability to raise offspring. I would boldly suggest that these animals could more readily adapt to climate variability than range reduction, habitat fragmentation or trapping, as they have obviously survived warmer periods before. Perhaps they would build a dirt den for their kits if snow was not available.

This is what happens when someone who has no clue about the REAL WORLD starts examining wild animals.

Picture this: you get up in the morning, cook your breakfast (which you have no idea about the source, just that there are eggs and bacon from the store). You get into your car (which you have no idea about the source, just that you went to the dealership and bought it) in the garage where it’s heated (or cooled), drive to your research facility where you park in underground parking.

You sit down at your computer (which you have no idea how it works, just that you can type things into it and they appear on paper) and load up the “Computer Model” (which you have no idea how it works, just that some “peer reviewed” people built it) and run some what-if scenarios through it. By changing a few variables (which you have no idea what they do, only that they’re adjustable) you come up with some really scary scenarios. At least, scary to you.

I guarantee that nobody, NOBODY who has ever been on the street actually believes that a vicious, aggressive animal like the Wolverine is actually going to be threatened by some relatively minor variations in climate. People with real-world experience know that an animal will do whatever it takes to survive, period. People peering out the tiny slits in their ivory towers have only the faintest clue about what is outside.

Ever been hungry? I don’t mean hungry like you only had 2 meals today, I mean hungry for days hoping to somehow collect enough change or discarded bottles and cans to be able to afford a cheeseburger from McD’s. Ever been so hungry that catching a rabbit running around the neighborhood and cooking it over a garbage fire seems like a good idea?

Ever been without shelter? Ever? If not, what possible clue can you have about wild animals, in the wild? I know people who think beavers build their dams and homes the same way we do. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of them think they have little beaver realtors selling beaver developments to each other.

I know some of these researchers, and they’re completely, hopelessly clueless. Life is not about simplistic migration for climate purposes, life is about finding food for the single purpose of surviving and a place to sleep that doesn’t get you hauled out and eaten in the middle of the night. Life isn’t about mommy and daddy buying you an education so you can make the big bucks and drive a nice car and live in a nice place without ever having to deal with bad people. It’s about a daily struggle to not die.

Wolverines, polar bears, they’ll be fine. They don’t sit around examining their options and needlessly fretting about “climate”. They eat, sleep, and reproduce. The End.

It really doesn’t matter what Ms. Peacock’s credentials are, she’s a simplistic idiot when it comes to this topic. And Wolverines will be alive and thriving LONG after Ms. Peacock’s ridiculous hypothesis is disproved and we all stop laughing at her. Unless some well meaning researchers start TAGGING the poor little buggers, that would kill them off.

Back in the late eighties, my wife (then girlfriend) and I had a wolverine circle our camp at dusk in a meadow at 8,000 ft in near our home in Montana. Needless to say, we kept the camp fire blazing all night.

Ironically, a few years later one of the grad students I was working with had a Stevenson screen destroyed by a wolverine. It was situated in an alpine meadow, in an adjacent mountain range. It was in splinters – the electronics were a total loss and there was wolverine scat nearby.

Snow pack has been above normal the last few years in Montana. Here is the current SNOTEL data

I read the paper and it seems reasonable. The natural questions for a skeptic to ask are, is the loss of the wolverine in the lower 48 states a bad thing, and will the wolverine’s range expand to the north in Canada. (The first is a values question, the second a science one.) The paper does not claim to address these. It is just looking at a small piece of a big puzzle. I don’t think the results will pay a big role in determining if we should reduce CO2 emissions. But there is no reason to denigrate the research itself.

The biggest threats to Wolverines are: fire arms, metal traps , and land use alterations that destroy their “homes” and damage their food supply. The same goes for any, near the top, predator. Notice, temperature, the presence or absence of snow and so on is not on this list. I suspect the authors are more or less correct in attributing danger to the actions of people. It is only which of their actions is the more serious or important. This also begs the questions of value systems. Mother Nature seems not to have one treating all creatures on an equal footing. It is only us who attribute some greater value to one creature over another, ourselves included.

Pamela Gray- I would hazard a guess there are still Wolverines in Wallowa Co.,
Union co. and Baker Co. in NE Oregon. Back in 1934, when there were supposed to be none, my Pop tangled with one while Deer hunting, up on Grayrock ridge, which is
over on the Umatilla Drainage, he had one shot left, and was prepared to shoot it
as it came up, but the pursuit of an old Doe was more in line with the Wolverine’s
menu-not a tough, stringy, Scots-Irishman/Cherokee. The tracks were confirmed to
be that of a Wolverine, as Pop got a Govn’t tracker to verify them. Then in 1968,
while running our Hound with her littermates, (back when you could actually hunt cougars with them.) we came across this set of tracks, I’d never seen anything ike them. Pop had-Curiously, the hounds would not have anything to do with the track. I got home and called a local biology teacher I knew. “There are no Wolverines here!” I said: “Ok the get your plaster an make a cast of these!” We did, he could not come to any conclusion other than-“It’s a dam’ Wolverine!” he had those casts in his class room for several years. I don’t know the disposition now… One other thing, this was on the face of Mt. Emily at about the 4,000 ft. level hardly high and snowy all year.
The decline of the real field biologists and the rise of the computer model are detrimental to real science in my opinion…

You have provided absolute proof that you do not have a skeptical mind.
###

Thanks for the feedback. I like irritating trolls about as much as I like studying carnivores. BTW, your comment makes absolutely no sense in relation to what I wrote, which seems to be a defining characteristic of greeny comments.

This is speculation in action, note that there is no actual problem at all, there is no proof of any population stress at all, there is not enough data to provide any actual solid evidence whatsoever. Yet here we have yet again yet another in a long line of scare stories based on nothing but speculation, here is anti science in action.

“The study found that climate change is likely to imperil the wolverine in two ways: reducing or eliminating the springtime snow cover that wolverines rely on to protect and shelter newborn kits, and increasing August temperatures well beyond what the species may be able to tolerate.”

When you examine the words closely they have no substance at all, it is a fabrication of a supposed problem about which they actually know nothing concrete but which serves the CAGW narrative perfectly and this one article perfectly illustrates how illusory in nature these CAGW scares actually are.

Look at the next paragraph for anything of substance:

“She analyzed three scenarios of greenhouse gas emissions: low (carbon dioxide emissions stay at present-day levels until 2020 and then decline to zero by the early 2080s); medium-low (emissions rise slightly until 2040 and then decline sharply toward the end of the century); and high (emissions continue to increase unabated).”

Another set of assumptions based entirely on another assumption that CO2 has any correlation with temperatures, the mechanism is unproven and yet there are models being used that have no basis in fact being used to create a scenario about which they actually know nothing. An illusion based on assumptions for which there is no actual solid evidence.

Here is the Achilles heel of CAGW theology and the myriad of wild claims made on its behalf, it all rests on CO2 being a major driver of the greenhouse effect, like an inverted pyramid if the tiny base crumbles the entire edifice collapses. No anthropogenic effect no ridiculous stories like this, no funding, no audience, no influence, no fear and no more emotional blackmail arm twisters.

The actual story is simply a plea for research money, they know that ringing the bell of CAGW gets money flowing, if they simply asked for money based on the truth which is they would like to study the Wolverine then no money would be forthcoming, its all tied to CAGW now. You want money? Tie your research to CAGW and its yours for the asking. Funnily enough I do have some sympathy with scientists who are reduced to this kind of begging bowl circumstance. Its a bloody shame isnt it?

James Goneaux says at 6:58 am: “the government re-introduced elk, which pushed out the moose, which led to a huge increase in the deer population, which has led to starvation…and the cycle continues.’

Recently I watched a decent documentary film about the release of wolves into Yellowstone, Wyoming (and Montana and Idaho). It was pretty decent (i.e., balanced) but also showed some very weird things such as the pens (prisons) for “bad” wolves on Ted Turner’s ranch, and also the extremely bizarre program to train (wild?!?!?) wolves not to eat livestock by using electrified dog training collars. Unless the producer had a very ironic sense of humor, these scenes were not intended to appear as bizarre as they actually were.

It really reminded me (as did your post James) that ecologists and environmentalists have been engaged in a decades-long battle of intrusions and manipulations against nature (“the wilderness”) under various environmental guises.

It’s just one intrusion after another, with almost never a thought given to unintended consequences, and then when things go wrong (wolves eating livestock, just as they did in the 1890’s) it’s straight back to the “saving the wilderness” drawing board with yet another intrusion, manipulation, and interference with nature (e.g., wolf prisons, electrified wolf collars) that will inevitably lead to yet more unintended results.

In southern Colorado, the high temp a couple days ago got up to -15C, tomorrow it might reach +10C. And these folks are worried about a couple degrees C driving wolverines to extinction? Over 50-100 years?

On the nasty critters that are endangered list; south of us in Jackson county especially, wolf populations are very high. Wolf population density is higher than the text books tell us it should get. So expect expanding wolf populations throughout southwest Wisconsin. The good news is that will drive out some of the coyote population.

Based on humanity’s long and hostile relationship with cockroaches, mosquitos, rats, bedbugs, coyotes, etc. it would seem there is only one logical course, if we are interested in preserving the long term well being of all of nature’s creatures. We need to immediately declare that all non human species are pests and commit to their complete eradication. All of the species we’ve devoted the most attention to wiping out have prospered gloriously, while those which we have spent extravagant efforts and costs to preserve have continued to decline, sometimes at an accelerated rate. Virtually every poor creature that has fallen under the tender mercies of PETA has ended up dead in relatively short order. The only species that have done well on the endangered species list are those which were never in any danger to begin with. It seems entirely clear that the best thing we can do for the planet, Mother Gaia and all her progeny is to declare our everlasting enmity toward them. Never underestimate the motivational power of spite.

Sigh. I commented on this story at Steven Goddard’s site last night so I’ll just repost my comments (based on the link he had) here:

“Back to this stupid wolverine story. Here’s the crux of it from that link:

“Springtime snow cover helps protect wolverine dens from predators, and the animal is built to thrive in deep powder.”

Really. The ONLY potential predator of a wolverine is another wolverine. So if there are less of them, less of a threat.

But that is beside the point. The reason snow is nice – not necessary – for their dens is that it provides insulation from the cold, for the newborn young. With the planetary fever that would matter less, except for the coldwarm.

And, yes, they have huge feet – their tracks look like little bears – which helps them “thrive in powder” in the winter, but not so much in the spring, summer, or fall. Moreover, these animals have huge home ranges which typically include big elevation/snow differences. Yet they do not seem to die.

Could go on but, as I said before, this story is beyond stupid.”

————-

And this related comment which adds perspective:

“Its worse than just that. If they can get a species, or subspecies, or ‘distinct geographic population’ (real or invented) listed as Threatened or Endangered, that gives legislated funding to save it – which could be a job for life for the ‘experts’ who do the ‘research’ to decide whether it should be listed that high or not. Bit of a conflict of interest, and a powerful incentive to find the worst of course.

Moreover, those listings, particularly Endangered, are powerful tools to use to lock up land use.

This is all the product of the new pseudoscience called ‘Conservation Biology’ which is the twisted sister of IPCC global climatology. They work together on many levels, as is perhaps best illustrated by the so-called Threatened polar bear.

And, really, given the coming planetary fever and all that, what isn’t Endangered?”

———
Also, I just saw this:

George E. Smith says:
February 4, 2011 at 10:30 am

“”””” Elizabeth says:
February 4, 2011 at 9:08 am

According to the Wik article, wolverines have no natural predators, but the kits are sometimes taken by predatory birds. “””””

The only predatory birds capable of taking very young kits would be a golden eagle or a great horned owl, and the former is the one most consistently found in current wolverine habitat. However, given the aggressive protective behavior of a female wolverine this would be a VERY rare event and, most relevant to this stupid story, they would not be plucking them out of their dens!

As for the ‘climate sensitivity’ and all that, there are historic fur trade records of wolverines from North Dakota… where summers are not exactly cool.

The reality for wolverines is just like polar bears, in that populations are now at historic highs in most of their current range because they were once heavily trapped, and now they are not.

“Society officials had tagged the young male wolverine in Wyoming near Grand Teton National Park and it had traveled southward for approximately 500 miles. It was the first wolverine seen in Colorado since 1919, and its appearance was also confirmed by the Colorado Division of Wildlife.”

It they tracked it they should have known it was in Colorado. It not likely the wolverine took the collar off and give it to a black bear or something else!

I now live in Los Angeles. I still have my 60’s vintage Alaskan parka with hood trimmed in wolverine fur (doesn’t ice up when you breathe through it). It occurs to me I haven’t seen a hog in years. I think wolverine fur scares off the hogs. Can I get a grant to study this if I tie it somehow to AGW?

This Wolverine story, is just another in a deluge of threatened, endangered, stressed, habitat deprived species sob stories being churned out by the “controllers.

Of late, I have been watching quite a bit of almost round the clock PBS T&V shows; that for a start repeat on an endless loop it seems; so three days later, I can watch the same show; perhaps on the same SF PBS Station or its San Jose sister.

Both of these stations are operating now in virtually continuous cadging mode; so every program is interrupted constantly by some named person telling me I should support mu PBS station and I can continue to get such wonderful programming. yes I support them; today is payday, and I can see how much of my pay check goes to support those stations in my taxes. The only reason I watch them is that those two stations are two of the three English Language stations that my rabbit ears can pick up. The other 53 stations that I can get, are all foreign language. Spanish, Chinese/Taiwanese/Mandarin/Cantonese; including Communist Red China as well, then Korean, Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese, Persian, Russian, German, Italian; even French

Another endless tape PBS program, is the “documentary” about how wasteful Americans are compared to families in India, and Cameroon. In India evidently 85% of all families’ main energy source is dried cattle dung; but they even have electric cars as well.
Cameroon, has a much lower carbon footprint than India or the USA, because they walk everywhere; and if you walk everywhere, you end up with quite large feet; I know I grew up in that condition. I think in Cameroon, they spend 85% of their time, out in what remains of the fields and forests cutting bio-fuels, which are of course carbon neutral.
These examples of green living, become even more educational, when you look at the total industrial product in the way of goods and services, Cameroon puts out compared to the USA; with India of course in the middle.

But for the endangered going extinct species, we have the ringed seals, and the fur seals, and the Narwhal, and the Bowfin whale, and beluga, and the polar bear which eats all of the former, so with any luck, they will all go extinct together; well I nearly forgot the Walrus in there didn’t I.
All of these animals need ice to walk and hunt on, or hide under, or knock holes in to come up and breathe; or get eaten by the PB. You see if the ice wasn’t there, all of them would go extinct either from lack of food, or from heart disease caused by lack of exercise escaping from the PB.

Somebody out there in the programming industry, is programming us all to learn to love the ice, and hate humans.

And when that happens, I become a whole lot meaner than any Wolverine you ever encountered. So stop it !

Wolverines are not usually found near people.
They can move around – one roamed from northern WA state (IIRC Wenatchee) up to Kamploops BC, then somehow across the very large Fraser River and south again (having to cross the Fraser again somewhere – it does have bridges though she may have simply swum across). That’s a lot of rough territory.

Interesting how they tracked her. At various locations wildlife people put bait in a tree such that the wolverine had to stand on hind legs to reach it, triggering a camera at belly height to record their distinctive belly markings.

An interesting attribute of wolverines is delayed gestation – impregnated early but embryo does not grow if at all until later, presumably connected to mother’s health (i.e. food supply in the spring).

Of course going by the cautionary principle of the crazed hippie hordes we ought to shoot all the wolverines, and polar bears, seals and pesky penguins as well, to assure they do not reproduce to so vast numbers they eat us all and take over the world.

Would you want your poor doe eyed innocent grand children get eaten by wolverines or polar bears (or slapped silly by seals and trampled by less than flying birds?)

Another in a long line of “If the world warms up and the environment changes, will it be bad for animal x?” You don’t even need to be a scientist to play that game.

If the Ice all melts at the south pole and the herring all die due to ocean acidification, will penguins have a rough time? Yep my “model” says they will.

If the US becomes a desert due to global climate change, might salamanders become extinct in the US? My “model” says you can bet they will.

If martians invade and destroy all prarie grasslands will Bison have a bad time? My “model” says You betcha.

It’s an easy game, Just pick any imagined environmental change and then pick an animal that depends on the previous environment and you are quaranteed a winner (loser?) You don’t even have to have a real model.

The wolverine/global warming false connection is part and parcel of a larger Agenda 21 strategy.

Note that all citizen visits to the Sawtooth Wilderness have been proscribed because of wolverines. Wildlife pseudo-biologists have determined that the mere presence of a human being causes wolverines to curl up and die. The Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National Forests are developing “Wildlife Conservation Strategies” that will eliminate recreational use of their “Recreation Areas” and wildernesses because of the fragile sensitivities of wolverines.

Note that all three Forests have deliberately and with malice aforethought promulgated megafires over the last five years. The fires have eliminated all recreational use across thousands of square miles, but not affected the wolverines in the slightest (evidently). A crown fire ripping through 100,000 acres is no great burden to wolverines, but the presence of human being on that same tract of land is fatal to them, according to the USFS and USFWS.

The objective is to de-humanize vast tracts of public and private land, in accord with the Wilderness Project dreamed up and promulgated by Earth First!

The Global Warming Hoax is not a stand alone thing. It is one weapon in an arsenal arrayed against humanity by a cynical and grasping Power Elite, designed to rob average folks of their wealth, property, and liberty.

“An interesting attribute of wolverines is delayed gestation – impregnated early but embryo does not grow if at all until later, presumably connected to mother’s health (i.e. food supply in the spring).”

It is actually called “delayed implantation” and most of the weasel family (Mustelids, of which wolverines are the largest) as well as bears have the same thing. It is the fall fatness of the female which determines how many fertilized eggs – from late spring to summer breeding – are implanted in the winter and thus how many cubs are born the next spring. Thus food supply regulates reproduction.

I am sure there is lots on this on the net. I have a whole (1963) book on the topic
called, what else, Delayed Implantation, edited by A.C. Enders, from The University of Chicago Press. The Library of Congree number is 63-18851 if you want to track it down.

The person who tagged the Wolverine is to be congradulated. He/she is either very very brave or excedienly stupid.
On another note why why do we want to protect something that would rather see you dead

Since wolverines are, pound for pound, probably the most aggressive and voracious mammals on the planet, I don’t think we need to worry about them too much, except in terms of self preservation. James Ellroy’s novel ‘The Big Nowhere’ has a good take on these feisty critters, which no animal that values survival messes with.

I am intrigued to know how they get tracking collars on them – maybe a pint of thorazine? But penetrating their fur to get a dart through would be difficult – it is primo quality and comparable to mink. And, anyone who has ever dealt with mink knows that these smaller and comparatively mild mannered cousins are extremely dangerous as well.

It is easy to see why computer modelling is preferred over field studies when wolverines are involved. Unfortunately, the outputs are worse than useless.

For those who have not witnessed a Wolverine , crashing lunch.
The Wolf is lucky it didn’t become lunch.
===============
Nice video.
Brings to mind this partial quote by Thomas Jefferson:
“We have the wolf by the ears, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go.”…

“Peacock analyzed results from new simulations carried out by a team of researchers at NCAR using the newest version of the Community Climate System Model (which was developed by scientists at the Department of Energy and NCAR with colleagues at other organizations).”

Question; does Peacock know anything at all about wolverine? I will wager that I have more hours studying wolverine in the wild then Peacock has. pg

They smell like a dead skunk and have a very bad disposition, so bad that wolverines avoid one another except to mate. So each has a very large territory and are rare. They are fearless even around people. Not something you would want next door.

Just like the polar bears these wolverines survived the Medieval Warm Period, Roman Warm Period and the Holocene Climate Optimum without going extinct so why would they not survive today which seems to be getting colder.
Just another scare built upon very thin ice and no idea of past earth history.

So we have a highly adaptable mustelid predator (basically a badger the size of an Alsation with the social graces of the really short guy at the pub) and we’re worried about it coping with better weather……..

If one spends enough time outdoors, it becomes obvious people who study animal populations don’t know what they are talking about. About 2000 to 2002 lynx were “re-introduced” to western Colorado. I had one looking into my living room through the patio door in 1995. They talk about reintroducing wolves to Colorado. I know ranchers who see them now and have for years in the back country between Aspen/Snowmass and Crested Butte. Oh yeah, wasn’t some guy named Arrhenius in on the development of animal population studies, the same guy the IPCC references improperly for CO2 sensitivity?

ScienceDaily (Feb. 2, 2011) — The sex of some species of turtles is determined by the temperature of the nest: warm nests produce females, cooler nests, males. And although turtles have been on the planet for about 220 million years, scientists now report that almost half of the turtle species is threatened. Turtle scientists are working to understand how global warming may affect turtle reproduction. To bring attention to this and other issues affecting turtles, researchers and other supporters have designated 2011 as the Year of the Turtle.

ScienceDaily (Nov. 15, 2006) — Global warming has already caused extinctions in the most sensitive habitats and will continue to cause more species to go extinct over the next 50 to 100 years, confirms the most comprehensive study since 2003 on the effects of climate change on wild species worldwide by a University of Texas at Austin biologist.

ScienceDaily (Jan. 24, 2011) — Global warming is already affecting the earth in a variety of ways that demand our attention. Now, research carried out at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem indicates that many tree species might become extinct due to climate change if no action is taken in time

You’re cluttering up the thread with comments about “turtle scientists.” The correct term is “biologists.”

I won’t bother to add turtles to my list of things to worry about, because you’re doing enough worrying for several people. And I see you’re still worried about polar bears, despite their 500% population increase.

I think that the phrase “Itachi no saigoppe” is appropriate in describing this study. It means, “The final fart of a weasel”, i.e. “Last desperate action”. :) BTW, the Japanese word “最後っ屁” is not nearly as crude as its English translation.

Smokey, that ecoEnquirer link is something. A sociopath who kills polar bears “because they are there”, is moved to console a poor beast in the hot snow. I think this demise for the pale bruins is more likely:

“The polar bear is the world’s largest land predator. They are primarily found in the arctic of Canada and Alaska. Our beautiful Polar Bear Rugs, are from bears hunted by Inuit (Eskimo) hunters in the Arctic of Northern Canada. We are one of the few companies that have access to aquire these bears. There are tight hunting restrictions to preserve the number of polar bears in the Arctic, there is a lottery to which the Inuit people can apply. Only one or two bears are permitted to be killed from each northern community. Only 500 bears in total are allowed to be hunted each year.”

“I’m chuckling at Anthony’s use of the term “weasel words”, given that wolverines and weasels are closely related though quite different in size.

(Other relatives include river otters – my brief sighting of them showed what seemed an undulation like a weasel’s movement, probably due to the high arched rear back. River otters are four-footed animals, whereas sea otters while probably related are not very mobile on land. Mink, polecats, ferrets, fishers, martens, ermine, badgers, skunks, kolinsky, sable, grison, tayra, and zorilla are also in the weasel family. Generally they have short legs, short ears, and fairly short noses (though the wolverine’s is more like a bear’s). Reputed to be strong for their size.)

My description of delayed gestation is not well stated, perhaps uses the wrong terminology, so you should refer to authoritative sources for information (Wikipedia has a brief description).

Wikipedia lists their “conservation status” as “least concerned”, probably due to the numbers in Canada though there are some in Sweden, Norway, Finland, Russia, and the US. It seems to me this is another overblown fuss by environmentalists who are eager to be concerned when range of a species varies somewhat whereas I see that as normal. Nor do wolves, according to http://www.timescolonist.com/technology/Fate+border+crossing+wolves+hands+judge/4199323/story.html. Environmentalists try to define each area as a separate species, even using the border as a divider (note the US government wanting to classify as endangered despite the many in Canada and porosity of the border – wolverines don’t comprehend that artificial line on maps). Wildlife experts seem more sensible. (And some fools get caught not understanding different words for the same thing – such as cougar/mountain lion/puma (note that wolverines are also known as carcajou, quickhatch, skunk bear, and glutton in various places in North America, according to Wikipedia.

Wolverines don’t have high population density and may be good at avoiding humans, as cougars seem to be. I’ve read claims by people on Vancouver Island who’ve spent a great deal of time in the forests and have rarely seen a cougar (plenty of tracks, excrement, and remains of prey but not the beast itself – granted VI forests can be heavy with undergrowth compared to drier places).

Thanks to those reporting first hand experience, like Paul C, Craig Moore, Jim Owen, Ockham, Douglas DC, “Doug in Seattle”, and others. Doug, note that colouring of animals varies somewhat with location – bears, for example, also vary winter-summer as they shed their longer hairs.

(Speaking of the Pine Pass, as Paul did, I read an environmental report on the probable impact of windmill towers east of there at Dokie Ridge. It claimed that the roads up to the towers would interfere with movement of wildlife. Sure, says I – they can amble down the roads instead of sliding down snowy slopes on their rumps. That’s a problem?)

As for finding wolverines, obviously you have to get out there in the bush, look, and ask any local people. Recall the laziness of alarmists who didn’t go back and look at bristlecone pines in CO, despite them being not many hours drive from a Starbucks. ;-)

What? Surely not another failure to just go look before spouting off! Oops! I guess so.

If life on this planet was as vulnerable as they want us to believe, there wouldn’t be a living thing left by now. Some points we should learn from natural history:

1. Nature prefers survival of the species over survival of the individual. A dead wolverine means nothing. Come back when you can tell me a good number for how many there are. Then the death of an individual can be assigned some meaning in the grand scheme of things. Let’s not even mention claims of never been seen somewhere in the last X years. Just go look to see if you’re right before you make the claim.

2. If push comes to shove, nature will try to keep as many species as possible in preference to survival of any specific species. The dinosaurs died out in some cataclysmic event according to theory. A whole lot of other life must have gone with them. But a whole lot of new stuff got a foothold and prospered in their place. And they weren’t created out of thin air. Their seeds must have been planted before or during that cataclysmic event.

So NCAR, give me a break. This is nothing but speculation and not worthy of having been written and published.